Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 3 Apr 1935

Vol. 55 No. 13

Committee on Finance. - Vote No. 66—Army Pensions.

Minister for Defence (Mr. Aiken)

I move:-

Go ndeontar suim ná raghaidh thar £260,002 chun slánuithe na suime is gá chun íoctha an Mhuirir a thiocfaidh chun bheith iníoctha i rith na bliana dar críoch an 31adh lá de Mhárta, 1936, chun Pinsean Créachta agus Mí-ábaltachta, Pinsean Breise agus Pinsean Fear Pósta, Liúntaisí agus Aiscí (Uimh. 26 de 1923, Uimh. 12 de 1927, agus Uimh. 24 de 1932) chun Pinsean seirbhíse Míleata (Uimh. 48 de 1924 agus Uimh. 43 de 1934); agus chun síntiúisí agus costaisí iolardha ina dtaobh san.

That a sum not exceeding £260,002 be granted to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1936, for Wound and Disability Pensions, Further Pensions and Married Pensions, Allowances and Gratuities (No. 26 of 1923, No. 12 of 1927, and No. 24 of 1932), for Military Service Pensions (No. 48 of 1924 and No. 43 of 1934); and for sundry contributions and expenses in respect thereof.

Provision is made in this Estimate for the payment of pensions and allowances under the Army Pensions Acts, 1923 to 1932 (wound and disease), and for service pensions under the Military Service Pensions Acts, 1924 to 1934. The total amount of the Estimate is £390,002. The amount of the Vote for 1934-35 (including a Supplementary Vote of £11,200) was £299,676. There is, therefore, an increase of £90,326 on the previous year's Estimate.

There is increased provision to the extent of £5,000 for wound and disability pensions and gratuities under the Army Pensions Act, 1932, which it is anticipated will be awarded in the current financial year. These pensions are payable from the 1st April, 1932, so that each new pension awarded involves payment of three years' arrears, in addition to the payment for the current year. During the financial year 1934-35, 154 new awards of pensions and allowances were made under the Army Pensions Act, 1932, amounting to £15,889 per annum and 112 awards of gratuities, in wound and dependency cases, totalling £9,305.

Provision is made in this Estimate for 122 further new awards of pensions and allowances amounting to £14,330 per annum, and 110 gratuities totalling £8,805, in wound and dependency cases. There is increased provision in this Estimate to the extent of £82,000 for military service pensions under the Military Service Pensions Act, 1934. Provisions is made for 1,500 pensions under that Act, and for arrears on 1,100 as from the 1st October, 1934.

Dr. O'Higgins

I merely rise to put a certain point of view to the Minister. I have no objection whatever to the Vote and no criticism to offer with regard to the administration. There have been, however, a very great number of Army Pensions Acts, each one dealing with merely a small fragment of a big question. The 1923 Military Service Pensions Act dealt with services prior to that date; the Wounds Pensions Act applies to wounds received on military service before and after the passing of that Act and is a continuing Act; and there is, then, what I might call the Disability Pensions Act, 1927. That definitely dealt with all disabilities other than wounds, in other words, disabilities as a result of illness other than wounds, but it only applied to disabilities acquired prior to the date of the establishment of the forces. That was 1st October, 1924. Then, we had the Defence Forces Pensions Act, 1923, which gave the Minister power, by regulation, to make provision for pensions, for disabilities and service, and other purposes of members of the Defence Forces.

It appears to me that there is a class of officer and soldier left uncovered by any of the Acts. These are the men who left the Army between 1927 and 1932 and who suffered from a disability acquired subsequent to 1st October, 1924. I admit that I am a little vague with regard to this. I am speaking mainly from recollection and some of my recollections with regard to these particular matters and Acts are ten or 12 years old. I feel certain that if there is a class left out, through an oversight on everybody's part— perhaps on our part as well as others —there was no intention by anybody to leave out any man who suffered from a disability and I merely want to call attention to the fact in case my recollection is correct, and to leave it to the Minister to rectify it, if it is correct.

General MacEoin

I should like to suggest to the Minister, with Deputy O'Higgins, that there are cases which should be covered by other legislation. I do not know whether I am entitled to recommend that at the moment. There is also the point I should like to make that, in a case of disability from disease, the fixing of 80 per cent. disability is out of all reason. That applies, of course, to the 1932 and the previous Acts. When a volunteer or soldier who serves his country suffers an 80 per cent. disability, you can make a coffin for him. He is dying and I think it is out of all reason that that amount of disability should have to be present before State aid can be granted. While, like Deputy O'Higgins, I have no complaint to make against either the administration of the various Acts or the amount involved, I do think that 80 per cent. disability is an unreasonable percentage. I would ask the Minister to reconsider that matter. If he was introducing legislation, the matter could be rectified as an amendment of the other Acts.

Mr. MacDermot

Arising out of the latest Military Pensions Act, there has been a widespread movement throughout the country to revive what is known as the old I.R.A. Associations have been formed all over the place, with the approval of the Government, of men who are members of the old I.R.A. and, naturally, these associations have played a prominent part in helping the members to present claims for pensions. I have no complaint about that situation so far as it goes, but there is an obvious danger that it should be used for political purposes and that is a danger that I feel obliged to call attention to on this Estimate. I feel obliged to call attention to it because of a speech to which I have already referred in this House, made by a member of the Government at Carrickmacross, three weeks ago. It was a speech to the local old I.R.A. Men's Association, and, in the course of it, Deputy Dr. Ward advised his hearers against admitting supporters of the Opposition into that association, giving as his ground that those who were supporters of the Opposition were ranged on the side of Ireland's enemies.

I think that ought to be protested against in this House. It is far from being conducive to the maintenance of peace and order and conducive to the elimination of unnecessary bitterness from politics and, in addition to that, it tends to throw suspicion over the whole of the administration of the military pensions legislation because it suggests that these old I.R.A. Men's Associations, which are specially efficient, or claim to be, and I imagine are, in supporting the claims of their members for pensions, should close their doors to supporters of the Opposition, the inevitable result being to turn them into a propaganda agency for the Fianna Fáil Party. I cannot think that the Minister for Defence would approve of that, now that it has been brought to his attention. One back-bench Deputy in his Party, Deputy Briscoe, definitely dissociated himself from Deputy Ward's speech on the last occasion when I mentioned it here; but what is more important is that the attitude of the Government should be made clear.

Mr. McGuire

I do not know whether I am strictly in order in raising one particular matter on this Estimate. There in a glaring case in Dublin City, South, of an individual whose name is Peter Kavanagh and who lives at 13 Golden Bridge Avenue, Kilmainham. That man, in the course of an armed conflict between the forces opposing each other during the civil war in this country, received 12 or 14 bullet wounds—I am not quite sure of the number—and as a result of those wounds he has been absolutely incapacitated. I take this opportunity of bringing his case to the notice of the Minister. I am aware that the Minister's Department has received sheafs of letters relating to this case, which is an extremely deplorable one and which richly deserves consideration. I know this individual has no legal claim. He is not entitled under any Act to get compensation for the awful incapacity from which he suffers and for the destitution to which the members of his family have been brought. I ask the Minister to give special attention to the case. If he is of opinion that the claim cannot be put on a legal basis, I hope he will at least make some ex gratia payment to Peter Kavanagh.

Mr. Aiken

Most of the points that have been raised are really outside the scope of this debate. On Estimates we are confined to debating the administration——

An Ceann Comhairle

Of the existing law.

Mr. Aiken

Yes, of the existing law, and as there has been no criticism on that I do not feel called upon to reply.

Mr. MacDermot

The Minister has nothing to say about the point I raised?

Mr. Aiken

That does not come under this Vote. The Deputy raised the matter before and he can raise it again and keep on raising it.